Literature DB >> 19138606

Is cranial reconstruction with a hard-tissue replacement patient-matched implant as safe as previously reported? A 3-year experience and review of the literature.

Naiem Nassiri1, Daniel R Cleary, Brett A Ueeck.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: This study aimed to verify the low complication rates (0% to 11%) previously reported in cranial reconstruction using hard-tissue replacement patient-matched implant (HTR-PMI). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A 3-year multidisciplinary experience involving 21 patients undergoing HTR-PMI reconstruction of large cranial defects was reviewed. Complications were defined as implant exposure, implant infection, or soft-tissue infection.
RESULTS: A statistically higher rate of complications was observed, compared with previous series (P= .043). We also determined whether previous bone infection, a history of diabetes, or smoking were risk factors for the development of complications. Diabetes, smoking, and pre-existing bone/implant infections were not significant risk factors for HTR-PMI failure. The higher rate of complications can be partially attributed to a diverse and complicated patient population, with multiple comorbid conditions and various indications for HTR-PMI reconstruction. In particular, decompressive craniectomies in trauma patients can be risky indications for the use of HTR-PMI.
CONCLUSION: Larger studies are suggested to verify our findings.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19138606     DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2008.08.032

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Surg        ISSN: 0278-2391            Impact factor:   1.895


  6 in total

Review 1.  Stereolithographic bone scaffold design parameters: osteogenic differentiation and signal expression.

Authors:  Kyobum Kim; Andrew Yeatts; David Dean; John P Fisher
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part B Rev       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 6.389

2.  Custom made onlay implants in peek in maxillofacial surgery: a volumetric study.

Authors:  G Saponaro; P Doneddu; G Gasparini; Edoardo Staderini; R Boniello; M Todaro; G D'Amato; S Pelo; A Moro
Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst       Date:  2019-07-31       Impact factor: 1.475

Review 3.  The Recent Revolution in the Design and Manufacture of Cranial Implants: Modern Advancements and Future Directions.

Authors:  David J Bonda; Sunil Manjila; Warren R Selman; David Dean
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 4.654

4.  Fracture of a HTR-PMI cranioplastic implant after severe TBI.

Authors:  Antonio López González; Pedro Pérez Borredá; Rebeca Conde Sardón
Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst       Date:  2014-07-17       Impact factor: 1.475

Review 5.  Complications Associated with Decompressive Craniectomy: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  David B Kurland; Ariana Khaladj-Ghom; Jesse A Stokum; Brianna Carusillo; Jason K Karimy; Volodymyr Gerzanich; Juan Sahuquillo; J Marc Simard
Journal:  Neurocrit Care       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 3.210

6.  Dural adhesion to porous cranioplastic implant: A potential safety concern.

Authors:  Christina M Sayama; Mohammad Sorour; Richard H Schmidt
Journal:  Surg Neurol Int       Date:  2014-02-18
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.